Organizational Learning Through a Process of Framing Orientations in Group Discourses

In this paper we endeavor to explore how organizational learning unfolds on the level of group discourses. Research in organizational learning ranges from small groups to large corporations. A useful framework to observe organizational learning is the exploration-exploitation concept by James March (Organization Science 2(1):71–87, 1991). Studies that are based on this concept primarily focus on the analysis of learning as an explorative activity that creates specific outcomes, for example new ideas, products, and strategies. In addition, another concept by Nonaka et al. 1996 describes organizational learning as a spiral between the modes of externalization, combination, internalization, and socialization between individuals, groups and the organization as a whole (SECI model). How this learning process is unfolding within those levels is rarely described, which is why our focus is on an analysis of learning processes as they occur in situ, at the level of group discourses. The authors analyzed video material from various group sessions and applied the documentary method (Bohnsack, Qualitative analysis and documentary method in international educational research. B. Budrich, Opladen, 2010) as a method of reconstructive social research to explore learning in situ, as it unfolds in the interactional group discourse. The authors argue that learning processes in group discourses are triggered by incongruences between frames of orientations of the individuals involved. However, not all incongruences initiate learning processes. Whether or not learning occurs, depends on the group’s interactions—namely their ability and willingness to switch from a communicative to a meta-communicative level of their discussion. Only on this level of communication, are individual framings of orientations likely to be reflected, negotiated or even newly created. The meta-communicative level is where learning as an explorative activity happens. In our examples, different orientations towards the next task of a group are discussed in various ways in order to get to a framing of the group’s orientation towards that next task. In contrast, the communicative level is where an existing framing of the group’s orientation towards the next task guides the execution process as exploitative activities. This work can be regarded as a pre-study to our current work in progress: the analysis of group discourses to explore the effect of design thinking on learning in groups.